Birdman? Really?

[DAME]

Posted: 1/3/15 at 1:16pm

I found it pretentious and boring. And the theater world it attempts to present... ugh. I think I even fell asleep. Gee I hope it is just not me becoming a old fart. And yes I am sure there are other threads about this. I don't give a ....

[TotallyEffed]

Posted: 1/3/15 at 2:00pm

The film is fantastic.

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 1/3/15 at 2:16pm

I kind of hated it, too, DAME. The acting was fantastic across the boards, but the filmmakers clearly knew nothing about the theater world. And, for a farce, it was incredibly heavy-handed.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 1/3/15 at 2:25pm

I thought it was exquisitely made twaddle. As much as I enjoyed the first ludicrous hour (yeah, a Broadway show aborts in a preview and it barely causes a ripple), and I did, especially Norton, I grew weary of its presumed stake on topics it wasn't really dealing with (like the theater, for one). When did it jump the shark fully for me? The use of the dyspeptic, brutalizing NY Times critic -- something out of Mel Brooks -- as a plot device, setting up one of its three endings that anyone could see coming. And then we have to endure that RADIO FLYER (think about it) final ending, when it wasn't just over but really, really over.

I was curious to note that none of the Times critics gave any of its components year-end notice (tomorrow's awards section). I think they all hated it and hated admitting it.

Updated On: 1/3/15 at 02:25 PM

[Borstalboy]

Posted: 1/3/15 at 2:30pm

I can sort of understand how some people like it but FOR THE LIFE OF ME I don't get the hosannas being piled on for its cinematography. Tracking shot-tracking shot-tracking shot-close up-close-up-close-up annnnd repeat 250x.
A very right-on pan of the movie

[Fantod]

Posted: 1/3/15 at 3:10pm

I didn't hate it as much as you, DAME, but I do agree that the Broadway scene that it tries to show is so very off-target. The movie wasn't good, but I didn't hate it.

[DAME]

Posted: 1/3/15 at 3:42pm

This film is being hyped up and up for all kinds of major awards. And why? WHY? Garbage! No one is going to remember this dreck one month after awards season.

Updated On: 1/3/15 at 03:42 PM

[Roscoe]

Posted: 1/3/15 at 6:47pm

I didn't find the film interesting enough to dislike, it just made no impression on me at all. A solid bore from start to finish, a movie to really make you appreciate the soda you have while watching it. I had a lovely Sprite -- refreshing, cold, invigorating, delicious. The movie? Oh, yeah, uh...

[Fantod]

Posted: 1/3/15 at 6:49pm

Roscoe, that's actually the most accurate description I've heard of the movie.

[DAME]

Posted: 1/3/15 at 10:54pm

Roscoe you are right on. I am more outraged at the praise it has been getting.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 1/4/15 at 12:47pm

Don't worry. It's tanking.

[strummergirl]

Posted: 1/4/15 at 3:41pm

I wasn't bored by it, but it has not stuck in my mind at all. I liked it more than Foxcatcher, but even my mixed feelings on it still stays in my mind.

It's like a Noises Off meets a man's death wish. I'm gonna presume the choice of the single take is to have it be assembled like a dream. Otherwise, why so much magical realism? **SPOILERS** I wouldn't be shocked if Riggan actually did die on stage. Everything went so according to plan in the moments before and after. I think he preserved that moment and got what he wanted in the end. **SPOILERS**

Anyway, not too well-versed with AGI's films and it seems I am better for it. Even if this was off the reservation for him, it seems his critics were even sharper here. Personally speaking, this made me appreciate Gravity much more. It just seemed like AGI playing showmanship with his buddy, Alfonso Cauron. Having the talented Gravity DP Emmanuel Lubezki adds fuel to that fire and it is not even close to Chivo's best efforts at all. Mainly because whereas he is so well-matched with the likes of Malick, the Coenes, and Cuaron, AGI comes off so short of those artists. Cuaron is a much better storyteller, has much better judgment in balancing genres within his own movies let alone entire filmography, and much more gifted in knowing what flows and goes in his scenes. Gravity is a film where I cannot really imagine taking anything out, never thinking its rare edits cut too early or too late. For a film that got painted as broad and too simple for Cuaron, its populism and attention to detail was virtuous. Here with Birdman, I just find its broadness condescending. Its comedy just feels fraught and low-brow, at times I couldn't tell if AGI is showing his own sense of humor or he is trying to provide Riggan's point of view as being broadly comic and low-brow on purpose. Nothing felt sincere. If you want an inside the industry mainstream, populist comedy that is well-made, well-shot, and well-edited, see Chris Rock's Top Five instead. If you want Capital A Acting by a small ensemble where every moment has spark and theatricality within every moment, see Dan Gilroy's Nightcrawler. If you want an Oscar contender that has no feeling of pretense to be an on arrival awards contender, see Boyhood.

One compliment I can pay to this film is that I liked the score, and of course, that is the only thing from this film that is ineligble for the Oscars.

[henrikegerman]

Posted: 1/5/15 at 11:49am

Liked the direction, particularly the "one take" feel of it.
Liked the cast, particularly Amy Ryan.
The script? Meh.

[east side story]

Posted: 1/5/15 at 1:21pm

I really enjoyed it. I have a sneaking suspicion I would not like it as much upon second viewing, though.

[haterobics]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 12:02am

I'm not certain how old DAME is, but if this is the first time you've seen a highly praised movie and didn't personally like it, you're living a pretty charmed life.

[lovepuppy]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 2:26am

I was so excited to see it. I guess it's because I like Michael Keaton. (But who doesn't like Michael Keaton...?) I was very disappointed in it and was relieved that I was able to watch it for free on my SAG award voting screener at home instead of paying for this. And I DID fall asleep in the middle and had to try it again the next night. Sigh. Disappointed.

Keaton was good, but like most of the sentiment here...it didn't make me *care* about any of the characters or the plot. Emma Stone was very good in it...if not a little over-wrought, but her character is over-wrought. And she's pretty much good in everything. Loved Amy Ryan. NO ONE was talking about her being in it before its release; wonder why; she's good in pretty much everything, too, especially here with such an under-stated role.

Hated the score...those drums were super-annoying very quickly. (Sorry to disagree with the poster who liked it.)

[Rumpelstiltskin]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 8:39am

I thought about asking if someone could explain the ending to me, but then realized I really don't care. I was just really happy that it ended.

Wish I had seen this thread before wasting fourteen dollars.

[DAME]

Posted: 1/6/15 at 12:38pm

" I'm not certain how old DAME is, but if this is the first time you've seen a highly praised movie and didn't personally like it, you're living a pretty charmed life."

Who said anything about it being my first time? I'm just reacting to this film.

[Islander_fan]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 4:54am

I really enjoyed this movie. I saw it twice and picked up different things the two times I saw it. I found it to be an amazing character study movie. I mean yes, I am not shocked to see that a message board full of theatre fans to be criticizing the Broadway aspect of the movie. However, I do feel that most of the general public aren't going to notice the inaccuracies of that. Furthermore, I do find them to be irrelevant to the movie since, like I said, the film to me is an amazing character study.

Oh, and themysteriousgrowl, Birdman is not taking by any means. According to IMDB, the film cost 22 million. It opened up initially as a limited release and when that was over and it was released everywhere it earned 25 million, so I wouldn't go so far as to say it's taking at the box office.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 7:32am

Thank you, Islander_fan. You're absolutely right. It's not tanking at all.

[Phyllis Rogers Stone]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 9:07am

Don't let it happen again!

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 9:23am

PRS!

[DAME]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 12:44pm

Well I am glad you enjoyed it Islander. I will be using my screener copy as a coaster before I throw it away.

[CarlosAlberto]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 12:47pm

You all have to understand that DAME is really old, doesn't get out much is partially blind as well as partially deaf. She kept on shouting at the screen: BATMAN! BATMAN! thinking Keaton was playing that iconic role.

It was kind of sad to witness really, but not sadder than the actual film.

[DAME]

Posted: 1/7/15 at 2:04pm

Loca! Are you watching me?